The page linked to above (and accessible by clicking on the 2013 LPC leadership graphic in the right-hand column) gives a detailed description of the endorsement rankings system, and a little bit of the rationale behind it. It also lists the endorsements that have been awarded so far.

I think that the endorsement rankings proved their worth in the races for the Bloc Québécois and NDP leadership in 2011 and 2012. The Bloc race was harder to track due to its low profile, but the rankings did pick Daniel Paillé to win it.

The NDP race was far more interesting, with endorsements coming from all levels of the party throughout the country. By the day of the convention, Thomas Mulcair was leading the rankings and was followed closely by Brian Topp. In the end, Mulcair beat Topp on the fourth ballot - an outcome that was projected during the interminable leadership vote. The endorsement rankings did quite well in assessing who the frontrunners were, with the notable exception of Nathan Cullen.

That was an interesting result, however. Of the candidates, Cullen was the most populist and least 'establishment', at least in terms of his proposal to co-operate with the Liberals and Greens. His campaign resonated with the rank-and-file membership, and he vaulted to third place ahead of Peggy Nash and Paul Dewar, who received far more establishment support. Cullen received few endorsements, especially outside of his native British Columbia, and so the rankings could not gauge him correctly.

Or did it? If the endorsement tracker is about gauging establishment support, with the assumption that establishment support will generally align with membership support, perhaps it was on the money. By under-estimating Cullen's first ballot support it gave a stark demonstration of how much of a membership favourite he was, and how much he was going against the grain of the party establishment.

Or perhaps Cullen's campaign was simply an example of one that cannot be tracked by something like the endorsement points system. The endorsement rankings are not a prediction of final outcomes, but rather one way to quantify the race and a method that will usually reflect how the race is going and where the candidates stand. While it missed out on Cullen, for example, it nevertheless pegged Mulcair as the frontrunner, Topp as the runner-up, Nash ahead of Dewar, and Niki Ashton and Martin Singh to be the bottom two. Not a bad result, and during the course of the convention the endorsement rankings only gave Mulcair the win on the fourth ballot.

At this stage of the Liberal race, however, the endorsement rankings suggest that it won't even go to a second ballot. Justin Trudeau has the lion's share (and a big lion it is) of endorsements so far, with the support of one-third of the Liberal caucus.

Trudeau starts the race with a commanding lead of 87.3% of endorsement points, followed at a distance by Marc Garneau at 4.9% and Joyce Murray at 4.4%. Martha Hall Findlay has 1.2% of endorsement points, tied with George Takach. David Bertschi rounds out the top six with 0.9%. Neither Deborah Coyne or Karen McCrimmon have a single endorsement to their name yet.

What to make of this? No one doubts that Trudeau has a wide lead over his rivals, and his impressive fundraising gives his campaign more than its fair share of credibility. I suspect, however, that if the vote were held today Garneau and Hall Findlay would take a much larger share of the vote. Perhaps that will be reflected as the race goes on and the two candidates start to get some endorsements. There's a very good chance that some of these candidates already have a few endorsements in the bag and are waiting for the right time to reveal them (say, after the first debate).

It should also be pointed out that Garneau, Murray, and Hall Findlay get a large portion of their points (and Hall Findlay all of them) from their own "self-endorsement". This is meant as a reflection of the pull they have within their party all on their own. Murray and Garneau are in their second term as MPs, and Murray was a provincial cabinet minister. Hall Findlay is a former MP (and leadership candidate). That is worth something in the endorsement rankings, as well as in the real world.

But the Liberal leadership race is not using a simple one-member-one-vote system. Instead, each riding will be given a value of 100 points and those points will be allocated according to how the members and supporters vote in each riding. So, for example, the vote of 200 members in a downtown Toronto riding will carry the same weight as the eight members in a riding in rural Alberta.

I will be doing the same thing for the endorsement rankings, except I will be breaking down the endorsements by province rather than riding. Here is how that breaks down (readers dating back to the NDP leadership race will recognize the graphics, which are based on CNN's presidential primary graphics. I used them in a post at the time, and liked them too much to not use them again).

Provinces without any endorsers yet (Alberta and Saskatchewan, as well as the territories) are allocated zero points at this stage, so the provincially weighted total is based on 26,300 points, rather than the full 30,800.

Broken down this way, Trudeau still leads by a wide margin. Even without the points from Alberta and Saskatchewan and the territories included, he has more than the 15,400 that will eventually be needed to win. He currently holds 71.5% of the total share of available points, with Murray trailing at 12.6%.

She gets bumped up from third to second due to her (self) support in British Columbia, a province worth 3,600 points. Garneau increases his share to 9.7% due to his (self) support in Quebec. Hall Findlay and Takach follow with 2.2% apiece, while Bertschi has 1.7%.

Hopefully the endorsement race will get a lot closer than this as the campaign unfolds. While I have little doubt that Trudeau would win if the vote was held right now, I am somewhat more doubtful that he would win with more than 70% on the first ballot. I suspect that it might go to a second or even third ballot at this stage. The endorsement tracker, then, is currently reflecting how much of an early juggernaut his campaign really is. The other candidates will need to gain some traction - and fast - in the first few debates if this is to become a real race.

(Note to readers: I based the list of endorsements on the Wikipedia page for the campaign, paying close attention to citations. Now that I have begun the tracker, I will be watching for endorsements myself. If there are any errors in my initial list of endorsements, please let me know.)

"An eighth candidate — Ottawa lawyer David Bertschi — submitted his nomination papers Thursday and a ninth — former cabinet minister Martin Cauchon — is poised to get his papers in by Sunday's deadline."

While this system may work for a delegated convention or One Member One Vote system, I think that Christy Clark demonstrated quite clearly in the BC Liberal leadership race that a weighted system can have a huge impact. She only had one caucus endorser, after all.

I also think that supporters will be casting their votes for reasons completely different from members. I'm not sure the majority of supporters will care about endorsements or vote in a way that would make endorsements predictive.

I'm not saying Trudeau doesn't have a significant lead, I'm just not sure that how many endorsements he has is actually indicative of that lead.

There is always the chance that endorsements will have nothing to do with the results, as in the BC Liberal race. If that were the case here, though, we'd probably have other indicators showing that. Clark's win was not a surprise, after all.

While I don't disagree that it might not be the best system, I heard all of these arguments during the NDP leadership race and it turned out to work just fine.

As long as people understand what the system is tracking and what that means, there should be no problem.

And Christy's win was certainly a surprise to Falcon and Abbott! :) I worked on Christy's voter contact team, and I don't think any of us thought it was a forgone conclusion, though we certainly grew more confident in the last few weeks.

It was always a matter of who was going to get more votes in the ridings that had smaller membership lists. Popularity in the ridings that had a large number of voters was less relevant because of the weighted system.

Here is a scenario question, as I am slightly confused about their process to elect the leader.

What if Trudeau only gets a plurality of the 30 800 points? Let's say in this scenario Garneau is second place. Can Findlay, Murray and the rest pledge their points to Garneau to bring him past the 15 400 threshold?

COMMENT MODERATION POLICY - Please be respectful when commenting. If choosing to remain anonymous, please sign your comment with some sort of pseudonym to avoid confusion. Please do not use any derogatory terms for fellow commenters, parties, or politicians. Inflammatory and overly partisan comments will not be posted. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.

Details on the methodology of the poll aggregation and seat projections are available here and here. Methodology for the forecasting model used during election campaigns is available here.

Projections on this site are subject to the margins of error of the opinion polls included in the model, as well as the unpredictable nature of politics at the riding level. The degree of uncertainty in the projections is also reflected by the projections' high and low ranges, when noted.

ThreeHundredEight.com is a non-partisan site and is committed to reporting on polls responsibly.